"No room for laxity while investigating heinous crimes against women and children": Jharkhand HC raps police for slipshod probe

The Jharkhand High Court recently came down strongly on the State Police for its shoddy the investigation into the murder of a woman and her three children by burning them alive (Chandrika Yadav v. State of Jharkhand). It was also alleged that the police was sabotaging the investigation and aiding the accused, who were threatening the family of the deceased..Taking a strong exception to how the investigation was stated to have proceeded, Justice Ananda Sen said,."The allegation of sabotaging an investigation and helping accused persons is a very serious allegation. The police, who are investigating a heinous offence, like the one, which is in hand, has to act professionally with utmost sense of responsibility while investigating the offence."."There is no room for any laches or laxity while investigating a heinous crime against women and children, nor any laches can be tolerated. The margin of error is zero."Jharkhand High Court.Factual background.The litigation before the High Court commenced with the petitioner receiving a call from his daughter's neighbour urging him to go immediately to his home. The caller warned the petitioner that if he tarried, his daughter would be killed that night because of trouble between the petitioner's daughter and her husband. .Since it was late evening when he received the call, he waited till the next morning. In the morning he received news that his daughter was in the hospital with two of her children, all of whom had suffered serious burn injuries. One child had died on the spot of the crime. Their bodies were scarred with burns. As she died, the woman declared that her husband and five others had set her and her children on fire. Her declaration was heard by the doctor, nurses, and lady police personnel..A complaint was registered, and investigation commenced. However, the accused began threatening the family of the deceased, supposedly with the help of the police. .The Court recorded the petitioner's submission that, "The police is taking all efforts to sabotage the investigation and are also taking all efforts to help the accused persons so that they can escape from law.".Noting that the allegations were serious, the Justice Ananda Sen called for the case diary to be produced in Court. .Shocked to see how investigation of the heinous crime has proceeded: Court.The case diaries maintained in the case revealed that the statements of doctors and nurses to whom she had confessed were not taken, despite it being averred in the FIR. .In a further twist in events, the first diary was supplemented by a second, which recorded some findings by the Supervisory Authority. The Authority stated that the woman had been discovered to have been in a relationship with another person and that sparked the differences between the married couple. The matter was to have been referred to a Panchayati but the 'unfortunate event' occurred, he recorded..This statement inscribed by the Supervising Authority was not backed by any material, the Court pointed out. .Apart from this, a supposed video recording with the woman's statement that the Supervisory Officer claimed to possess was not even transcribed. The Court noted, "Even the gist of what has been said has not been mentioned in the entire case diary. Is the Investigating Officer or the Supervising Authority trying to hide something?".In its strongly-worded order, the Court warned against investigations being conducted for the purpose of completing formality.."In a case where a lady alongwith her three minor children dies because of extensive burn injuries and the allegation is against in-laws, of burning her alongwith her minor children, the investigation cannot be done in a slip shot manner for the purpose of completing formality."Justice Ananda Sen.That charges were made only against the husband, despite the woman's statement that there were an additional five people involved was another fact the Court took notice of..While questioning why two parallel investigations seemed to be carried out by the Investigating Officer and the Supervisory Authority, the Court also found that the same supervisory officer was involved in another case where the investigation was not conducted properly..This necessitated an investigation against the Supervisory Authority, the Court opined..Recording its dissatisfaction with the manner in which the investigating and supervisory authority proceeded with the investigation, the Court stated:."This Court is shocked to see the manner in which the investigation of this sensitive and heinous crime has proceeded. Not only the investigation but also the supervision has not been done professionally or seriously"..Taking all these instances into account, the DGP was asked for his views. He submitted that a CID inquiry into the matter would be the best option..On this note, the Court ordered that the investigation be transferred to the CID and the Investigating Officer and the Supervisory Authority be relieved from handling the case and investigating other crimes..Read the Order here: